Ive been in a 2016 Mustang rental for a week. Some thoughts

[JoeAyalaM]

Mustangs do not look bad on the outside, and maybe not on the inside, that is in a weird retro kind of way. But, boy do they drive bad! The steering, suspension and Auto transmission are decades behind the Camaro's. Of course that is only MHO.

[The_Driver]

Originally Posted by Drags1998

Same legroom as the Camaro!!! LOL!!!

Yeah, but the Mustang rides on a wheelbase that is 3" shorter. Also, it looks like the front seats are as far back as they could possibly go.

[pjz1082]

I am not a Mustang fan by any stretch but I do kind of like the interior on the Mustang. And it pains me to say that. The one thing I cannot stand in the Camaro is the center air vents. Why in the world do i want them blowing on my hands when I'm shifting the car? It just seems dumb. Everything else I can live with as I think GM has made some great steps forward on the interior design. But they still have a ways to go to match up with some of the competition, with respect to the interior.

[bbrown450]

Those toggle switches get me everytime !!! Seriously looked at a new Stang with Perf pack... Hauls ass...makes noise but does not do it wit the class you get with an SS or the precision...it appeals to the "get there quick on the least $$" crowd and is a respectable. Car...but lacks the class and moly the SS has with its addressable driving modes that effect all aspects of the way it steers, drives and shifts and suspension(with MRC). The Gen 6 is a much better package of performance and luxury.

[jimmie]

Thanks for your "personal" comparison and critiques.

The pictures say a lot, more than just words can depict. Thanks to those who posted them.

Love the Camaro, always have. My bias just naturally over looks any of the Camaro's faults.

However, the Mustang is still one hell of a nice car, and I could be very content owning one. ("1975" my very first car was a 1965 Mustang, followed by four Camaros)

I truly thought the Mustang had more back seat room than what's depicted from the images.

[motorhead]

Originally Posted by jimmie

Thanks for your "personal" comparison and critiques.

The pictures say a lot, more than just words can depict. Thanks to those who posted them.

Love the Camaro, always have. My bias just naturally over looks any of the Camaro's faults.

However, the Mustang is still one hell of a nice car, and I could be very content owning one. ("1975" my very first car was a 1965 Mustang, follow by four Camaros)

I truly thought the Mustang had more back seat room than what's depicted from the images.

Im having a feeling that the guy that posted the pics of the vert with no rear legroom purposely moved both front seats bad all the way just to prove a point. I have a friend that owns the new Mustang vert, and I can fit in the back seat at 5'10'. No pony car except for the new challenger ever had that great of rear seat room. The new Camaro is really bad that way. It doesn't matter to me though. If I need more than two people to ride, i wouod just take one of my other cars.

[SuperSound]

Originally Posted by motorhead

Im having a feeling that the guy that posted the pics of the vert with no rear legroom purposely moved both front seats bad all the way just to prove a point. I have a friend that owns the new Mustang vert, and I can fit in the back seat at 5'10'. No pony car except for the new challenger ever had that great of rear seat room. The new Camaro is really bad that way. It doesn't matter to me though. If I need more than two people to ride, i wouod just take one of my other cars.

What good is legroom when you have to sit with your head tilted 45 degrees. Neither the Mustang nor the Camaro have a useful back seat. And getting in the back seat of the Challenger is just as hard for anyone who isn't a yoga instructor.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk

[RallyHT]

Originally Posted by The_Driver

Yeah, but the Mustang rides on a wheelbase that is 3" shorter. Also, it looks like the front seats are as far back as they could possibly go.

The seats were as far back as they could go. I am 6' 2" and I needed every bit of that leg room. My wife however, did not need the leg room, but was more comfortable with the seat position there. I know there is no leg room in the Camaro either. Although I have not measured, I suspect the Camaro has less room width-wise in the back 'seat' in a convertible.

Bottom line. I spent days in the Mustang. I also spent time going through the Mustang versus the Camaro options, test driving the Camaro, and then I made my decision. The Mustang is a cheaper product. The Camaro is a better product in multiple ways. If those product differences don't matter to someone (specifically for the higher price) then they are going to go with the Mustang.

I think anyone that tries to judge these cars without actually getting in them and trying them (equipped near to their desired config) is not making an informed decision.

If I had bought the Mustang, without ever sitting in a Camaro, I would not know what I was missing... until I later sat i and drove one - that would have been a bad day. Some people can tell the differences in quality and some don't notice as much. I am married to one of those that can and her input was valuable in the decision process. But she is also why we have a Cadillac Escalade EXT and not a Chevy Avalanche.

[Zeke.Malvo]

Originally Posted by JoeAyalaM

Mustangs do not look bad on the outside, and maybe not on the inside, that is in a weird retro kind of way. But, boy do they drive bad! The steering, suspension and Auto transmission are decades behind the Camaro's. Of course that is only MHO.

Decades? Please list comparable cars from the 1990's and older that had all of the features and total package the Mustang currently has, I'm really interested to see this list.

[RallyHT]

Originally Posted by motorhead

Im having a feeling that the guy that posted the pics of the vert with no rear legroom purposely moved both front seats bad all the way just to prove a point. I have a friend that owns the new Mustang vert, and I can fit in the back seat at 5'10'. No pony car except for the new challenger ever had that great of rear seat room. The new Camaro is really bad that way. It doesn't matter to me though. If I need more than two people to ride, i wouod just take one of my other cars.

Seats moved to where comfortable for someone 6' 2" puts them nd my 5' 4" wife felt comfortable. There is no more leg room in either a Mustang or a Camaro.

Suggestion:f I you want four usable seats, be shorter or look for a four door car.

[RallyHT]

Originally Posted by motorhead

The premium interior looks much better than the base.

Agreed.

[motorhead]

Originally Posted by SuperSound

What good is legroom when you have to sit with your head tilted 45 degrees. Neither the Mustang nor the Camaro have a useful back seat. And getting in the back seat of the Challenger is just as hard for anyone who isn't a yoga instructor.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by RallyHT

Seats moved to where comfortable for someone 6' 2" puts them nd my 5' 4" wife felt comfortable. There is no more leg room in either a Mustang or a Camaro.

Suggestion:f I you want four usable seats, be shorter or look for a four door car.

Agreed they all pretty much suck in the back seat department. My buddies Challenger is the best of the three in that department, but then again it's basically a two door 300.

[hotlap]

Originally Posted by SuperSound

What good is legroom when you have to sit with your head tilted 45 degrees. Neither the Mustang nor the Camaro have a useful back seat. And getting in the back seat of the Challenger is just as hard for anyone who isn't a yoga instructor.

During the 11 years I owned my 04 GTO I used the back seat ~four times (iirc). Too hard to get in and out with the power seats. The back seat of all theses cars is ok for impromptu trips with little kids or short distances with adults. I've CUV that I'd use otherwise.

My biggest Camaro complaint would be the trunk opening. Ditch the struts and use a torsion rod to maximize the opening. Oh, and skip the cargo net. My wife's purse is bigger and its hook points make it useless for trapping items between it and the rear

[nvrsatisfied]

Originally Posted by RallyHT

The seats were as far back as they could go. I am 6' 2" and I needed every bit of that leg room. My wife however, did not need the leg room, but was more comfortable with the seat position there. I know there is no leg room in the Camaro either. Although I have not measured, I suspect the Camaro has less room width-wise in the back 'seat' in a convertible.

Bottom line. I spent days in the Mustang. I also spent time going through the Mustang versus the Camaro options, test driving the Camaro, and then I made my decision. The Mustang is a cheaper product. The Camaro is a better product in multiple ways. If those product differences don't matter to someone (specifically for the higher price) then they are going to go with the Mustang.

I think anyone that tries to judge these cars without actually getting in them and trying them (equipped near to their desired config) is not making an informed decision.

If I had bought the Mustang, without ever sitting in a Camaro, I would not know what I was missing... until I later sat i and drove one - that would have been a bad day. Some people can tell the differences in quality and some don't notice as much. I am married to one of those that can and her input was valuable in the decision process. But she is also why we have a Cadillac Escalade EXT and not a Chevy Avalanche.

That's on point. I owned the 15 PP GT before buying my Gen6 1SS. The Mustang has the retro theme going, but the front end is waaay too long. Rowing through the gears felt like accelerating a hard take off in a boat. The front end has a very floaty feel. I did talk to David at Steeda Manufacturing to look into a full spring kit to eliminate the bounce. At high speeds the hood shook. I decided to sell the car rather than mod it. The interior looked nice, but it was not premium quality as stated by the trim level. I never did get comfortable in the driver seat and the steering wheel felt plastic and hollow.

People are comparing leg room, but I want to point out that the form of the back seats Make a difference as well. The mustang has this ring that sticks out on the top, sides, and bottom of the seat. Place a child seat on those seats and there is less room than the Camaro. I guess an adult wouldn't make a difference since they would force the ring to be flush with the cushion, but a car seat and infant would not have the same effect.

Tre manual transmission is not what I would expect on a performance car. I would get this thump when shifting into first gear and any passenger in the car was startled by this as well. I don't understand why they didn't use the same transmission that is in the GT350, it is way superior to the Chinese transmission used in the GT.

I loved the look of the GT, I just expected it to be much better, especially in the premium trim with Performance Package.